WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 04: U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), joined by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and fellow congressional Democrats, speaks at a press conference on Department of... WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 04: U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), joined by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and fellow congressional Democrats, speaks at a press conference on Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding at the U.S. Capitol on February 04, 2026 in Washington, DC. The Democratic leadership outlined their demands for ICE accountability as Congress debates funding legislation for the DHS ahead of next week's deadline. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images) MORE LESS

I’ve been observing the unfolding conversation about big DSA wins in New York City on Tuesday and specifically the clout Mayor Zohran Mamdani has gained because he went three for three in congressional endorsements. It’s a complex picture and I’m generally more sanguine about what’s happening than others. As I wrote, I think Chevalier doesn’t have any business in Congress. Lander and Valdez are simply the left wing of the Democratic party and on that front even Lander and Valdez are very different candidates. I may do a separate post on Chevalier’s extremism on Israel-Palestine and, yes, Jews, as well as other issues. Important topic but not the topic of this post.

I’ve made the point a few times that our political language and mental geography assumes that there are two political spectra in the Democratic party, one that is right/centrist to left and another that is accommodation to fight. It’s often assumed that these pretty neatly line up — progs and left-wingers are up for a fight but the more center-left or liberal folks are more cautious, institutionalist or even accommodationist. And yet there’s no real connection between these two things.

So far, so good. You’ve heard me make this general point many times. But it is really on the center-left, or liberals, to make clear that this isn’t the case. And to a great degree they are not — not convincingly — though there’s been progress on this front over the last eighteen months. And in a political climate in which people are both really angry and really scared and think major change is necessary, the old rhetoric, the old posture just isn’t going to cut it. It doesn’t speak to anyone. It seems jarringly out of touch with the moment.

Want to keep reading?

Join and get The Backchannel member newsletter along with unlimited access to all TPM articles and member features.